https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160906 An appellate authority's refusal to grant stay of recovery under section 42(4) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994, was held unsustainable because it was passed without reasons. Although the provision did not expressly repeat a duty to record reasons, the exercise of statutory power affecting rights and public revenue still required application of mind, consideration of relevant facts and law, and a fair hearing. A cryptic or cyclostyled order disclosing no reasoning was treated as arbitrary and inconsistent with fairness. The impugned order was set aside, and the stay application was directed to be decided afresh after hearing the petitioner. en-us Thu, 04 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Dec 2013 14:50:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160906 An appellate authority's refusal to grant stay of recovery under section 42(4) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994, was held unsustainable because it was passed without reasons. Although the provision did not expressly repeat a duty to record reasons, the exercise of statutory power affecting rights and public revenue still required application of mind, consideration of relevant facts and law, and a fair hearing. A cryptic or cyclostyled order disclosing no reasoning was treated as arbitrary and inconsistent with fairness. The impugned order was set aside, and the stay application was directed to be decided afresh after hearing the petitioner. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 04 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160906